User talk:C.Fred: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 02:35, 31 August 2017

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by .

Welcome to my talk page.

Please sign and date your comment (by adding ~~~~ at the end) to assist the bot that archives this page.
Please add a new thread to the bottom of the page if you wish to leave me a new message. If you're following up on a previous message, keep your comment in that same place:
- If you leave me a message here, I will reply here and {{Mention}} you here or leave a {{Talkback}} template on your talk page, unless you indicate that you are watching my page or no talkback message is necessary.
- If you are responding to a message I left on your talk page, please reply there so the discussion stays in one place. Please {{Mention}} me in the message there or leave a {{Talkback}} template here so I know about the message, unless I indicate that no talkback is necessary in my message. If you are commenting here on a message or warning I left there, don't be surprised if I move the discussion back to your talk page.
This page is set for automatic archiving every 7 days. I will remove talkback messages as acknowledgment that I have read the related reply, and I reserve the right to summarily remove any uncivil comments.

Thank you, and happy editing!

Vanessa O'Brien Article

Good day. Is there a way to send you a private message about an issue I am having with other editors on the Vanessa O'Brien article? I was threatened on my Talk page by one of the editors when I tried to correct a wrong on this article last week, and didn't want to list the name(s) of those editors publicly on your talk page if I had a way to send you a message privately. Thank you. Salvatore42 (talk) 13:16, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Salvatore42: Normally, I would say to take the matter to a talk page. However, I just semi-protected the article because multiple new accounts are adding material that runs afoul of BLP, so I can see where you have concerns that you may want to discuss off-Wiki. You may email me (assuming you've registered an email address for yourself) via the "Email this user" link at left. —C.Fred (talk) 13:26, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Collin Delia

it is about my son i am new and having a hard time with this — Preceding unsigned comment added by C Deals (talk • contribs) 02:54, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reply at your talk page, in the thread about the nomination for deletion. —C.Fred (talk) 02:56, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Canada

Canada is objectively located in the northern half of North America. Geometric accuracy is obviously important. The edits I made to the Canada article are objectively constructive. I am the state (talk) 17:13, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

High school football

The material you removed yesterday came back. I removed the worst of it but tried to keep a bit, but it needs to work. No objection if you think it should all go. Meters (talk) 19:34, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Enquiry about ritodrine

Please can you help? How can I edit ritodrine to include the fact that when children reach adolescence they may develop mental health issues? Sorry I'm new to this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjingjie (talk • contribs) 19:39, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mjingjie: What is your source for this "fact"? —C.Fred (talk) 19:41, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.medschat.com/Discuss/yutopar-aka-ritodrine-241313.htm

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00044-014-1066-1

For example — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjingjie (talk • contribs) 19:48, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mjingjie: Medschat is a discussion forum and is not a reliable source. The article by Suaifan et al does not support the claim of developing mental health issues in adolescence. —C.Fred (talk) 19:52, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is a youtube video link allowed that only shows the side effects on the mother when on ritodrine? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjingjie (talk • contribs) 20:04, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mjingjie: Depends. Who is presenting the video? And if it's only showing side effects on the mother, that does not address effects on the child at all. —C.Fred (talk) 20:13, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If I can't mention the effects on the child then so be it but the video can support the side effects on the mother that are already mentioned in wikipedia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKiExFioFBA — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjingjie (talk • contribs) 20:18, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mjingjie: If it's already mentioned, we probably don't need an additional source. And you didn't address the question: who produced or is otherwise responsible for the video? A video on YouTube could come from a number of sources, and many of them aren't reliable. —C.Fred (talk) 20:51, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is my video and it is me. I think it is important to show in video what the side effects can be because reading and seeing are two very different things. You want my medical files to prove it? I can provide if necessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjingjie (talk • contribs) 20:54, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mjingjie: Sorry, but Wikipedia does not allow publication of original research. Your video falls into that category, so it is not allowed.

The video would need to come from an independent, reliable source—a TED talk, PBS, the BBC, etc.—before it could be used as a source. —C.Fred (talk) 21:05, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wow this is really frustrating. Ok one final question. This is a fact fact promise. Can we include that the medication was designed to be used for a short period of time (days). I can find the relevant link again. You see people are being put on this medication for months but it was designed for just days. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjingjie (talk • contribs) 21:08, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot speak for C.Fred, but this is my personal opinion. If a drug was designed to be used for days only, but people are being put on it for months, then this is a major problem and you should immediately report it to the appropriate authorities. Immediately! Wikipedia is not an apppropriate authority, so please do not report it here. Please focus your efforts on the people responsible for solving the problem. MPS1992 (talk) 22:51, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mjingjie: Maybe. According to what reliable sources was it only to be used for days, and according to what reliable sources are people being put on it for months? Basically, it has to be happening often enough for reliable sources to document it. Also, when we're talking about medicine, the sourcing rules get stricter: WP:MEDRS comes into play.

Yes, it feels like a frustrating process. However, consider that all of these hoops, safeguards, and double-checks exist because people have put bad information into articles in the past. It's a pain, yes, but it's a necessary evil. —C.Fred (talk) 23:50, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

IP evading block?

Hi C.Fred, I think one of the IPs that you reverted the edits of on L.A. Love (La La), one of the 24.41.xxx.xxx range, returned with the IP 107.77.215.181. They restored their edits there and on several other pages. Ss112 00:43, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey again, I've found the same IP now using 107.77.215.24. Ss112 11:44, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like one of the IPs is back restoring their edits using 24.41.228.188. Ss112 13:37, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The 5th Records

Hello, I was just wondering why in particular the page "The 5th Records" was taken down, and what process went into you making that decision. Thank you!

John Hopkins23 (talk) 02:18, 29 August 2017 (UTC)John Hopkins[reply]

@John Hopkins23: It was taken down because there was no assertion of significance or importance about the company. The process is described at WP:CSD. —C.Fred (talk) 03:06, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

UGA football national titles

It's been over 3 years since you posted in the talk feed so I thought I would shoot you a message since I spotted it. I rev a pic of the University Football practice facility showing the two claimed national titles and a media mentioning the other three not claimed. I created an Unclaimed nat'l titles into the info box to fit with other football wikis. Just wanted you to know since I saw your name on the talk page about this.KillerFrosty (talk) 15:24, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Corporate soccer

Hi C.Fred, thank you for your input. I appreciate it. It's obviously my first attempt at doing this, so naturally I will screw up. But, if you don't mind, allow me to ask you to edit my content. Let me know what I need to make sure the article is well written and well documented. I can forward you some news articles that have been written about our federation (FIFCO) and our role in the federation. Again, thank you for your help.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by CorporateSoccer (talk • contribs) 02:07, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@CorporateSoccer: Sounds like you need to review the conflict of interest guidelines. Wikipedia is not the place to promote your organization. —C.Fred (talk) 02:09, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

C.Fred - I did not see this as a self promotion. The CCSL is a national league, with players, teams and other. In my description, I never mentioned how to sign up, nor how to participate. In fact, I stated the facts of what the league does, where it plays its games, the amount of players and our international affiliations. Seeing your comment, did you actually read the article I posted? Is it mostly that my user name is the same as the league that bothers you?

˜˜˜˜ — Preceding unsigned comment added by CorporateSoccer (talk • contribs) 02:24, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@CorporateSoccer: The user name is the red flag that screams conflict of interest. As far as the actual article, I read it and found that it made no assertion that the league is any more notable than any other league of amateur teams. Rec leagues, Sunday leagues, and the like all generally get culled by CSD A7.

Also, please sign your message by adding four tilde characters, not four hyphens. —C.Fred (talk) 02:27, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, this is clear. I get it now. But with all due respect, corporate league is not in the same category as a sunday rec league, nor any beer league. The corporate teams, of the like of Apple, Ubisoft, PwC etc, all compete at city, national and international levels. We are affiliated to an international organisation that promotes the game, the teams and the championships. There is world cup associated to it. I have never seen a rec league at this level before. The international federation has articles about them, but in foreign languages, does this help?

˜˜˜˜

@@ Line 104: / Line 104: @@
 :<span class="template-ping">@[[User:CorporateSoccer|CorporateSoccer]]:</span> The user name is the red flag that screams conflict of interest. As far as the actual article, I read it and found that it made no assertion that the league is any more notable than any other league of amateur teams. Rec leagues, Sunday leagues, and the like all generally get culled by CSD A7.
 :Also, please sign your message by adding four tilde characters, not four hyphens. —'''[[User:C.Fred|C.Fred]]''' ([[User_talk:C.Fred|talk]]) 02:27, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
+Ok, this is clear. I get it now.  But with all due respect, corporate league is not in the same category as a sunday rec league, nor any beer league.  The corporate teams, of the like of Apple, Ubisoft, PwC etc, all compete at city, national and international levels.  We are affiliated to an international organisation that promotes the game, the teams and the championships.  There is world cup associated to it.  I have never seen a rec league at this level before.  The international federation has articles about them, but in foreign languages, does this help?
+˜˜˜˜